|
|
|
|
djones
Noob
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 08 F250 4wd
Joined: Mar 2008
Member # 4342
|
|
| Check out the latest parts and accessories from Truck Hownd |
|
|
offroad250
Horsepower Member
Premium Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 2005 F350 4x4 Diesel
Joined: Dec 2006
Member # 1754
From: Macedon NY
Visit Gallery
|
 Posted
- April 4 : 8:55a
| Well, You cant get LSD anymore, so no need even worrying about it. Plus you cant run it in a motor with a DPF even if you had some. The ULSD provides lower performance and fuel economy, so we use more of it, but its better for the environement. Hopefully they balance out.
I havent seen "premium diesel" around here, but I would assume it has a higher cetane level. I would stick with the normal diesel and run my own additive, like powerservice.
Paying $4.35 here, hope it doesnt go much higher....
Jason | |
DrSpeed
Writer/Photographer
Premium Member
Blogs: 22 (View)
Vehicle: Ford F-550, Gixxer 750,
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 103
From: Bellingham WA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- April 4 : 11:43a
| Quote: Originally posted by offroad250
Well, You cant get LSD anymore, so no need even worrying about it. Plus you cant run it in a motor with a DPF even if you had some. The ULSD provides lower performance and fuel economy, so we use more of it, but its better for the environement. Hopefully they balance out.
|
A few corrections - LSD may still be available in the form off off road diesel (ie red diesel). Not for use on highway, nor your truck, unless it spends 100% of its life on the farm.
ULSD does not provide lower peformance. It loses some lubricity due to the lower sulfer content, but is made up with additives the oil companies add in the fuel.
ULSD is used so it does not poison the aftertreatment systems (ie catalytic converters like the DOC and DPF) since they use a platinum of paladium washcoat. Similar to how leaded gasoline would plug up cats.
The lower performance and increased fuel consumption results from the aftertreatment systems, as that takes away from the engine efficiency. Additionally, engine manangement has to reduce NOx emissions (retarded timing, low combustion temps, and EGR), further reducing efficiency. | |
DAFBFD58
Supercharged Member
Premium Member
Blogs: 1 (View)
Vehicle: 02 F-250 Farm Fab Edition
Joined: Jul 2005
Member # 200
From: Cecil County MD
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- April 4 : 4:37p
| | I know in IL they still have LSD. That is where my buddy with the dodge is at right now. | |
Petrol
Turbocharged Member
Premium Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 155
From: Richmond VA
Visit Gallery
|
|
Petrol
Turbocharged Member
Premium Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 155
From: Richmond VA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- April 7 : 1:20p
| Quote: Originally posted by DrSpeed
Quote: Originally posted by offroad250
Well, You cant get LSD anymore, so no need even worrying about it. Plus you cant run it in a motor with a DPF even if you had some. The ULSD provides lower performance and fuel economy, so we use more of it, but its better for the environement. Hopefully they balance out.
|
A few corrections - LSD may still be available in the form off off road diesel (ie red diesel). Not for use on highway, nor your truck, unless it spends 100% of its life on the farm.
ULSD does not provide lower peformance. It loses some lubricity due to the lower sulfer content, but is made up with additives the oil companies add in the fuel.
ULSD is used so it does not poison the aftertreatment systems (ie catalytic converters like the DOC and DPF) since they use a platinum of paladium washcoat. Similar to how leaded gasoline would plug up cats.
The lower performance and increased fuel consumption results from the aftertreatment systems, as that takes away from the engine efficiency. Additionally, engine manangement has to reduce NOx emissions (retarded timing, low combustion temps, and EGR), further reducing efficiency.
|
like he said "The ULSD provides lower performance and fuel economy" 
ULSD is a debucle, not as big a debucle as ethanol, but still a damn big cluster, and for what?
higher refining cost and yet another product to store, transport, and distribute.
for the auto makers, yet another high hurdle to clear = more expense for R&D. more expense for epa compliance. further complexities in design, outsource partnering / procurement. more expensive manufactering / warranty work & maintenance issues. flame throwers. less performance. less fuel economy.
|
Edited by - Petrol on April 7 1:29p |
|
DrSpeed
Writer/Photographer
Premium Member
Blogs: 22 (View)
Vehicle: Ford F-550, Gixxer 750,
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 103
From: Bellingham WA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- April 7 : 3:35p
| They fuel itself doesn't change anything...
The reason for the fuel is the after treatment.
You put ULSD in a truck designed for EPA Fed fuel, it'll run exactly the same...
but wait, I forgot...Petrol's the expert...what do I know... | |
upparoom
Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 2002 F250 Turbo Diesel
Joined: May 2008
Member # 4483
|
|
Mort
Nitrous Member
Premium Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 2003 Freightliner FLD C10
Joined: May 2005
Member # 86
From: Mortville WA
Visit Gallery
|
|
offroad250
Horsepower Member
Premium Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 2005 F350 4x4 Diesel
Joined: Dec 2006
Member # 1754
From: Macedon NY
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 14 : 8:30p
| lol I wish I could have transmitted some sarcasm in that. Maybe I should have put some "quotation marks" around it.
They say its better for the environment, but since it lowers fuel economy, we use more.... so, is it really that much better?
Thats what I was trying to say...
Jason | |
upparoom
Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 2002 F250 Turbo Diesel
Joined: May 2008
Member # 4483
|
|
DrSpeed
Writer/Photographer
Premium Member
Blogs: 22 (View)
Vehicle: Ford F-550, Gixxer 750,
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 103
From: Bellingham WA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 15 : 9:53a
|
seriously..that shit pisses me off.
Not as much as bio-diesel. I almost got into a fist fight with a hippy over bio diesel. | |
ford_trck
Supercharged Member
Premium Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 99 1-ton CC LB manual
Joined: Jun 2007
Member # 2928
From: Peoria IL
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 15 : 12:02p
| | All this emessions bull shit is why we now have low sulpher diesel. The thing is that now diesels are taking in dirty air and through the exhaust is cleaner air than what goes into it. How is that not more than what we need for emissions | |
DrSpeed
Writer/Photographer
Premium Member
Blogs: 22 (View)
Vehicle: Ford F-550, Gixxer 750,
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 103
From: Bellingham WA
Visit Gallery
|
|
Thermo
Horsepower Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 97 Ford Expedition lifted
Joined: Sep 2006
Member # 1199
From: Norfolk VA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 15 : 4:04p
| the removal of sulfur is due to the production of sulfur dioxide during the combustion process. Sulfur dioxide by itself is not a big issue. But, the sulfur dioxide then get mixed up in the clouds and forms what as sulfuric acid as it mixes with the water in the air. This is what most people know as acid rain. That is why the big push to get rid of sulfur in the diesel fuel.
Yes, the sulfur is needed in the older trucks to maintain some amount of lube to the injectors. Supposedly there is enough remaining that it won't affect the injectors of the older trucks. I don't know how much I would trust that as I know the injectors on a diesel truck are very expensive ($3000 for a set of 8). Most guys have started running some form of lube additive to the older trucks.
The new ULSD fuel requires significantly more processing, hence the increase in the cost of the fuel. Also, diesel requires more basic crude oil to make a gallon of fuel than basic gasoline. Between these two, that is why the price of diesel has skyrocketed.
I still plan on buying a diesel, but I plan on removing the DPF system, getting an aftermarket computer chip and running straight biodiesel. That way, the cost of fuel is next to nothing, the production of sulfur dioxide is nill, and I get my decent mileage out of a full size truck. Sure, I am taking a chance on a big bill should something go wrong, but over time I think all will balance out.
Chris "Thermo" Coleman and Nukie, the radioactive 97 X | |
Mort
Nitrous Member
Premium Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 2003 Freightliner FLD C10
Joined: May 2005
Member # 86
From: Mortville WA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 15 : 6:25p
| | I think everybody should convert to greasel. Just drive to behind the McDonalds and fill 'er up. | |
ford_trck
Supercharged Member
Premium Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 99 1-ton CC LB manual
Joined: Jun 2007
Member # 2928
From: Peoria IL
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 16 : 12:05a
| | Mcdonalds could make a lot of money if they added a grease/fuel station to their restaurants | |
DrSpeed
Writer/Photographer
Premium Member
Blogs: 22 (View)
Vehicle: Ford F-550, Gixxer 750,
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 103
From: Bellingham WA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 16 : 3:10a
| Quote: Originally posted by Thermo
the removal of sulfur is due to the production of sulfur dioxide during the combustion process. Sulfur dioxide by itself is not a big issue. But, the sulfur dioxide then get mixed up in the clouds and forms what as sulfuric acid as it mixes with the water in the air. This is what most people know as acid rain. That is why the big push to get rid of sulfur in the diesel fuel.
Yes, the sulfur is needed in the older trucks to maintain some amount of lube to the injectors. Supposedly there is enough remaining that it won't affect the injectors of the older trucks. I don't know how much I would trust that as I know the injectors on a diesel truck are very expensive ($3000 for a set of 8). Most guys have started running some form of lube additive to the older trucks.
The new ULSD fuel requires significantly more processing, hence the increase in the cost of the fuel. Also, diesel requires more basic crude oil to make a gallon of fuel than basic gasoline. Between these two, that is why the price of diesel has skyrocketed.
I still plan on buying a diesel, but I plan on removing the DPF system, getting an aftermarket computer chip and running straight biodiesel. That way, the cost of fuel is next to nothing, the production of sulfur dioxide is nill, and I get my decent mileage out of a full size truck. Sure, I am taking a chance on a big bill should something go wrong, but over time I think all will balance out.
Chris "Thermo" Coleman and Nukie, the radioactive 97 X
|
The primary reason for the conversion to ULSD is to prevent the poisoning of the Platinum based washcoat on the DPF (and DOC on Class 6-8 trucks). Sulphur prevents deactivates the catalytic coating, preventing the DPF from regenerating.
As for purchasing a new truck and hacking out the DPF...you how does that make you more green....is running recycled veggie oil supposed to balance it out? | |
Thermo
Horsepower Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 97 Ford Expedition lifted
Joined: Sep 2006
Member # 1199
From: Norfolk VA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 16 : 5:34a
| Dr Speed, as for "balancing out" running biodiesel vice normal diesel after removing the DPF, I see it this way: the oil that I am converting into biodiesel would have most likely ended up where? The land fill? In a land fill, it is going to do what? Seep into the water table and ground and create havoc there? So, why not atleast get a positive out of the whole process. Is the running of biodiesel truely the "green" solution? No. But, atleast doing things this way you get one more step of positive out of the material before you end up with the negative. Until there is biodiesel created from a plant material that is widely available, this is the next best thing in my mind. Granted, I have a different view of the ethanol "debackle" that is going on now. I say to quit making the ethanol out of corn meat (the kernal corn) and atleast use the whole cob and plant (you get twice as much fuel out for the same acreage of land). Granted, the better solution than that is to use switchgrass. That can be planted anywhere (the land between the lanes of the highway, sides of a mountain, unused farm land, etc). That way you are not affecting the land used for the food chain and you still get something positive out. Not to mention that you get even more fuel out of switchgrass than you do corn (for every gallon of fuel needed to raise and convert the crop, you get 2.5 gallons of ethanol out from corn meat, 5 gallons from the whole corn plant, and 10 gallons from switchgrass). The other benefit of switchgrass is that the plant absorbs more CO2 in its growth than is given off in the burning of the eleven gallons (10 that it produces and the 1 gallon used to harvest it). So, lets see, you get fuel from a non-petroleum product and you drop the CO2 level on earth. The loosing point?
Granted, this country of ours needs to cut the rope and get ourselves free from oil. But, that will involve most of us having either an ethanol plant in our back yard or god forbid, a nuclear power plant. I work in the nuclear industry. If you knew the protective systems involved in the modern plants, it would make your head spin. Granted, starting in 2009, the nuclear resurgence is going to happen. 15 plants are already slated to be built and there are licenses for 15 more awaiting someone to say that they will build a plant.
Biodiesel is not the final answer, but it is a push in the right direction in my mind. Every gallon of crude that can be saved only makes sure that we won't be paying the high cost of it.
Chris "Thermo" Coleman and Nukie, the radioactive 97 X | |
DrSpeed
Writer/Photographer
Premium Member
Blogs: 22 (View)
Vehicle: Ford F-550, Gixxer 750,
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 103
From: Bellingham WA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 16 : 2:01p
| what about the waste product from bio-diesel refining in the garage?
The glycerine, the lyes, the solid products...like french fries. You bury that..ain't that a wash? And isn't that worse? | |
DrSpeed
Writer/Photographer
Premium Member
Blogs: 22 (View)
Vehicle: Ford F-550, Gixxer 750,
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 103
From: Bellingham WA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted Wirelessly
- May 18 : 11:54a
| See, I wouldn't have any trouble if you were trying to be 'green' and run bio and the DPF. But everything you're saying and doing, very hypocritical. You think you can trump people by throwing out big words? The internet can make anybody sound like a genius.
| |
Thermo
Horsepower Member
Blogs: 0 (Add)
Vehicle: 97 Ford Expedition lifted
Joined: Sep 2006
Member # 1199
From: Norfolk VA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 18 : 5:41p
| Dr Speed, it all depends on the process used to filter the biodiesel. I personally plan on using a resin bed setup vice relying on lye or other chemicals to chemically clean the oil. While this is a more expensive way to do it, it is also better environmentally. Not saying that it is perfect, but a lot better than other methods.
You give people enough words, sure, they can justify anything. Is using a stock truck with the ULSD the best method? I can't say for sure. I don't have the million dollars worth of testing equipment and trained engineers on my side. But, some change needs to be done to minimize the need for crude. Someone has to start somewhere. Besides, I figure if the plants being grown for the biodiesel absorb even a small fraction of the CO2 generated from burning the fuel, that is still a lot better than the process for the crude. Each way has its pros and cons. Which is easier on the environment in the long term? I can't say and from what I am reading, the scientists of the world can't even agree. So, until there is data out there that everyone can agree upon, no one is going to win an argument like this.
So, in short, I am trying to do something to minimize the need for crude. Let those with the oil keep it. If you get enough people doing this, the price of oil drops and helps out a lot more people in the long run.
Chris "Thermo" Coleman and Nukie, the radioactive 97 X | |
DrSpeed
Writer/Photographer
Premium Member
Blogs: 22 (View)
Vehicle: Ford F-550, Gixxer 750,
Joined: Jun 2005
Member # 103
From: Bellingham WA
Visit Gallery
|
Posted
- May 19 : 1:22a
| Didn't answer the question...
I don't need to pursue this any further. You can do whatever the hell you want.
| |
| |
|
|
Ultra Low Sulpher Fuel
